Humanitarian Assistance and Religion

(I’ve arrived in Kampala and am safe and sound!)

I am currently en route to Uganda and contemplating where tostart this new round of blog entries. First let me tell you that I’ll be inUganda through mid-March and then will travel to Liberia until the end ofApril. More details to come on the work and all sorts of other exciting things.But, given that I’m on an airplane, let’s talk about one ofthe things that often occur to me when traveling, which is that it seems likeI’m surrounded by people on missions or church trips on every flight. It’sreally incredible how many people go to and from these countries regularly,whether to provide aid and development assistance, or to spread the gospel andassist local churches. There are also school and volunteer trips and the like,generally short term things working with particular communities.

Let’s focus on religiously based groups that engage in thissort of work. Everywhere I have worked I have encountered members of religiousorganizations. There were Mormon missionaries on my daily bus in Ecuador,Seventh Day Adventist missionaries on bicycles in the Dominican Republic,people who left Liberia during the conflict and returned to work with localchurches, and religious groups from the Middle East supporting work inIndonesia.

I think it’s easy to make a snap judgment about whether ornot development work should be tied to religion, but as with much of this sortof work, it usually depends on the organization. On the positive side, religionhas the potential to unite groups of people who might otherwise not interact.People are often willing to work for groups associated with their religion, asthey view it as a way to give back as well as a way to support and spread theirfaith. Alternatively, religion can be divisive; for example if two religionsco-exist in a particular area and an outside organization only providesservices to the members of one group this can lead to everything from angerfrom those not receiving support, ostracization among groups that may have beenfriendly in the past. Which of these outcomes occurs has much to do with theorganization and its goals, both explicit and implicit, and their inclusivityor marginalization of those with different backgrounds.

I believe it is important to look at ethical guidelines whenevaluating any emergency response or development program, and those sponsoredor led by religious organizations should be no different. The first element ofsuch work is “Do No Harm”; all programs must be considered for both theirpotential positive and negative outcomes, and must be evaluated to ensure thatparticipants do not experienced unanticipated negative consequences from theirparticipation. In addition to this, the issue of coercion must be addressed,because how coercion is defined is context specific. For example: if I tell youthat I’ll give you a flu shot for free in return for answering myquestionnaire, and you have health insurance, so you can access the flushot without me, then that is not a coercive incentive for participation in anygiven program. However, if you’re uninsured and your only means for protectionagainst the flu is to participate in my research or program, then the practicemay be coercive, as there are potential negative consequences for you notparticipating, ie you get the flu.

Let’s translate this to Uganda for example: if a religiousorganization offers free education to all children at a local school, withoutdemanding that they worship at this school or adhere to those beliefs, thenthey are simply supplementing the public education system. However, if thisreligious school is of superior quality to the public school, and the only wayto enroll is to subscribe to adhere to a particular belief system, bothchildren and parents may be coerced into subverting their own personal beliefsfor their children’s education.

An actual example is where I was in an island country andwhile there were public schools (one public high school in the country) thehigh school that was widely regarded as the best was private and Mormon run (mymemory might be failing me, it could be Seventh Day Adventist). If you attendedthe church associated with the school, your children attended school for free,however if you were a member of a different church (regardless if it was alsoChristian) your children had to pay fees to enroll. So, for access to qualityeducation for their children, parents changed (or pretended to change) theirreligious beliefs. In my book this is coercion, worship my god or pay money youdon’t have to educate your children?

And so, as you may have noticed with my blog entries, therereally is no clear cut answer here. I think what is important is that we holdall development organizations, religious or not, to the same ethical standards.Religious organizations should not be allowed to discriminate based on race,creed, ethnicity, ability, religion, or anything else. Religious organizationsdo not get a pass on equal promotion of human rights simply because they aretargeting a particular population. 

There have been a variety of instances where theintervention of religious organizations in conflict zones, South Sudan duringthe conflict for instance, has actually fueled the conflict itself. In aneffort to assist South Sudan (viewed as the ‘Christian’ side of the North/Southwar, but that’s a little simplistic in truth), foreign Christian organizationsprovided funding to the SPLA, or Southern Sudanese liberation group, which isnow officially in power in the country. Without the funding (and access to weaponsaccording to some sources) provided by these external sources, the war mighthave ended long before it did.

There are religious groups that do great work, and there arethose that miss the mark, as can be said about humanitarian and developmentgroups in general. But let’s hold everyone to the same standard, because nomatter whether you’re doing the work for your God or your conscience, thepotential for unintended negative consequences for those you want to help hasthe potential to be equally devastating.

What do you think about intertwining religion and humanitarian assistance? Is it a good way to tap into commitment to a cause and funding, or is it similar to government and religion (according to my Western background) and the two should be separated lest they corrupt one another?